Globalization, technicity and the digital divide

Globalization is the way to describe the spread and connections of production, communications and technologies around the world. This includes the like of McDonalds and Nike who have spread their influence around the globe to turn in huge revenues. The result of this globalization has been the merging of economic and cultural activity across borders. What's a nation again?
The World Bank, the European Central bank and the IMF are at the forefront of promoting this integration to the world through various means. They say they want to create a global free market for goods and services to help economies. This political project championed by the likes of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown can have the effect of damaging poorer nations such as the ones in Africa where the IMF has entered.

The benefit for a country being online is that they are more likely to prospore as they are interconnected to the outside world. More services will be available for that country to use and take advantage of. If the infrastructure of a country isn't set up to handle the internet, then businesses are unlikely to move in as they do not have the facilities to produce an effective business location or plant. We can see this in Africa where the total usage of the internet is 6.2% as opposed to the rest of the world. The company's in Africa are mainly mining things like gold or rail works which are built by the Chinese.
We can see that countries in Africa who have taken to accepting IMF loans on the pretence of it helping the nation have actually done the opposite. It would seem that the IMF has harmed growth in these nations that actually help it grow. "Twentyeight African countries had per capita GDP under $1 per day in the 1990s, and only 15 reached levels above $3 per day in 1995 dollars. Fourteen African countries               
had higher real per capita GDP in 1980 than in 2000. Meanwhile, during those two decades foreign debt rose from half the GDP to 1.2 times the GDP, and the average African country’s dependence on development assistance increased, surpassing 10% of the GDP. Since 1990, 35 African countries have spent a total of 205.5 years in IMF programs, participating on average 45% of the time. Africa has become paradigmatic for critics from both sides of the political spectrum who argue that IMF programs are harmful rather than beneficial (Easterly 2001; Stiglitz 2002)."

From the IMF track record it doesn't seem like they do a very good job of helping economic recovery. Good luck Greece! Maybe you should have taken Iceland's stance and let your currency collapse rather than taking the IMF bullet. Greece like Ireland has more or less lost it's sovereignty to the IMF. Because of the large loans the country's have took on their shoulders, they now have to impose heavy austerity measures, resulting in a shrinking of the economy, loss of jobs and lower wages. There is no money for prosperity when all of your taxes are going toward's paying off the loan or maybe loan's. No business will move to a failing economy or leave the business inside to ruin. That's why we see the west and more over the east in better economic positions. Maybe this is the curse of globalization, let some prospore and others suffer.

Politicians and governments have promised that this new world order of globalization will have to open up and free the market for trade, whilst also trying to keep the west from falling under due to the emerging economies of the East. This is supposed to bring with it, higher wages, creation of jobs whilst helping companies stay stable. All though saying this we can really see the opposite happening. Companies have been moving abroad to places in the East like china where they can get very cheap labour, it's basically slave labour, leaving the original place of manufacturing without work. A company called Foxconn in China has installed suicide nets because of the amount of people jumping off the building because of work conditions. Company's like apple, Nintendo and HP use these facilities.  

  Tony Blair struggles through a answer and basically says it doesn't matter if you don't want globalization, it's  going to happen.

We have a digital divide today between different parts of the world and with in a local level to. Depending on your geographical location in the world, you may not have access to computers as they are distributed unequally, priced to high as well as the constant rapid pace in change of technology, leaving you behind. There is also a divide between the younger generation and older generation. The younger are more likely to use computers, smartphones and tablets to access the internet to feel the benefits. At least the older generation won't get square eyes! There is also a social divide though between segments of the communities though as the rich can afford the best digital equipment you can buy, enabling them to keep up to date with the rapid change in technology as opposed to the poorer segment who gets their uncles nokia 3310.

“The general trend in both the developed and developing countries is that while the poorer people only get them as a result of the ‘trickle-down’ effect when prices of computer and Internet connection become affordable” p. 127, Digital Cultures: Understanding New Media

We can see a digital democratic divide to. The internet is a great place to organize activism such as groups like Occupy wall street and the arab spring. In democracy's (and I use that term lightly), we are allowed to do this most of the time, to band together and organize an event. Where as places such as Egypt can have their internet turned off in an instance.

“With modernity, mechanical models of physical and social life gave way to models centred on the production and maximization of life itself, including the coupling of the body and machines in new ways, in factories, schools, hospitals, and family homes“

(Escobar 2000:58)

In p. 15– Jon Dovey and Helen Kennedy, Game Cultures: Computer Games as New Media

The birth of computers, smartphones and tablets and other devices has the changed the mould of society and  has changed the way a society can unite. We are now connected with each other and can share thoughts and ideas with people from all over the world. People with the same interests and who use these devices can now "maximize life" by connecting together like never before. It is because of this globalization that this has only just begun. Global movements like "occupy" were motivated by our governments decisions but also because of our habit of using technology to spread and read information.

A reflection on Digital culture

This module has made me realize that we need to analyze and look at the digital world as a culture and understand where the direction of this culture is leading us. It would seem that some areas in the digital culture may not be progressing towards a positive outcome. Before taking this unit I was aware of some of the issues that were raised but didn't really look at the whole picture and bring it together. I have come to realize that the digital world is engulfed in everything that we do even though we may not realize it. It would seem that the digital world and the real world are blurring together and will one day become a singular from so it will redefine the phrase "digital world".

One of the most fascinating topics I covered for me was Robotics and development issues, cyberwarfare and cyborgs. I previously had some small knowledge about how robots were being used in war and the digital devices being used for humans but I didn't realize until studying the topic just how big the scale was in which robotic systems are taking over war and our body's. In the last 50 years robots have accelerated massively, taking over the battlefield, domestic chores, automotive, assembly and food packaging and production. I still think this is a massive problem because no one seems to care that these systems, all though great for productivity and execution, are dwindling job opportunities for people looking for work. For example, we always see in the news that car manufactures are laying people off because they don't want to pay them as it's cheaper for them to use robots to do the same job. These people then have no job and then get sucked into the  benefit system with no escape. It's not like the government will help, they aren't exactly looking after the economy as they should and building jobs. A government full of multi-millionaires seems to be out of touch with the common folk.

I think this is one of the most important areas to look at when studying digital culture. We need to find a solution so that the digital industry does not take away jobs from the average joe. I think we need to be also wary of how much we embrace digital culture, we need to detach and see the world for what it is otherwise we may end up like one of Kevin Warwick's heartless cyborgs, living a lonely existence.  

In conclusion I would like to say that digital culture is a key module for me whilst studying Journalism. I did not realize before starting this course how important this topic would be but I was pleasantly surprised that it covered many of my interests. In the future, many things we have discussed will be at the forefront of debate in which we will have to decide how to move forward with technology.

The Digitization Of Your Money

The internet has transformed the way we use our money. The digitalization of money has given us, credit cards, debit cards, systems like paypal, e-money and worst of all, a contribution to an increase of debt. Of course some of the things that have come out of this digitalization have been a good thing but on the other hand there are downsides as usual like killing the way people pay with cheques which is being stopped in 2018.

Most people these days will walk around shops today without any money in their pocket or withdraw only the amount of money they will need to purchase the item they desire. It's great for card users because you are not limited by the specific amount of money in your pocket. They are also a great benefit as they have less chance of losing loose money and it also means if you get your wallet stolen, the thief will be able to steal a small amount of cash unless they know how to use debit/credit cards to acquire the information they need to withdraw the money.  Many pose the question, do we spend more with plastic rather than if we had the money in our hand? Personally, I know that I spend more money with my card as I get older. I don't really think about the funds I have in the bank and if I will have enough money to pay that next big bill. Small amounts of money are easier for us to spend than large ones. The larger bill is an after thought.

Art Markman, Ph.D, cognitive scientist at the University of Texas says
"Richard Feinberg explored the link between credit cards and spending in a 1986 article in the Journal of Consumer Research. He varied whether people could see credit card logos while they were making purchases or leaving restaurant tips. People left higher tips and indicated that they would be willing to spend more for products when they could see a credit card logo at the time than if they could not.

In addition, people may pay less attention to prices when they are paying by credit card than when they are paying by cash. For example, the article by Prelec and Simester cites an unpublished study by Dilip Soman suggesting that people are less likely to remember the amount they spent on a purchase when they pay with a credit card than when they pay with cash".


Credit/Debit cards have also transformed the way we shop in the way that we buy and sell things. The internet has enabled anyone to buy anything online from anywhere in the world if you have a card, well you could mail a cheque but that isn't so popular. This has opened up the world to the average consumer who may of had to travel to great lengths to acquire the item they desire before hand. As well as this, company's like Ebay and Amazon which wouldn't actually exist if wasn't for online transactions so it had created a market which was not present before hand. This has increased our debt largely though.
"The typical family debt, excluding mortgages, has increased by 48% to £7,944, equating to just under a third of average annual household take-home income, Aviva's Family Finances report said".
Even though we have been hit with austerity cuts this hasn't slowed down our thirst for the luxury's we want and the figures show it. Although the main contributor making us get into to debt is the soaring prices of services, food and oil making many turn to credit cards with high interests.

The digitalization of money has also created new ways to use money. On the web we now have e-money(electric money) which some company's take advantage of to sell and buy their services. Sites like Ebay do not use normal currency to transfer money between the buyer and seller but use a service called paypal. It eliminates the danger of your details from your cards been stolen as the paypal account has credits in which equal the money you put into it.

"PayPal is a safer, faster, more secure way to pay online – your financial details are never shared. We remember everything for you, safeguarding your bank, credit or debit card details.
You can use PayPal to pay for items on eBay, or at any of the thousands of retailers that accept PayPal".

Online shopping though great, also opens the door for opportunists who seek to steal your credit/debit card. Some hackers create phishing sites which are sites which look like the legitimate site you wanted to visit. For example you may want to visit your bank online and click on  an email your receive, unbeknown to you it a fake site waiting for you to enter your card details. So the invention of the credit card has opened up new ways for people to steal your money. They also make them for sites like paypal so that isn't really safe either. This is not to say though that email providers are not stepping up to protect you. They now have phishing detectors which will notify you of any scams. Total fraud losses on UK debit and credit cards fell by 28% between 2008 and 2009 to £440.3 million says the BBC.

The importance of the Web and web 2.0

As I have progressed through this interesting module, I have come to understand just how important the web/web2.0 is and how important the original ideas of this concept were. It seems imperative in the world we live in today that we keep on eye on the internet as it evolves, because it seems that the internet war has begun.

The original concepts of the internet were to connect people, connect data and transparency. It is true to say that today all of these concepts have worked to a certain extent. We can connect through social networking, we connect through blog's which may link to other blog's and we can search the internet on governments and what they are doing in their countries.

The idea of the internet is to have no walls between data, every piece of data should be available, be transparent to connect to. The internet has it's own rules to play by or none, but the internet's original concept of transparency and shareable data has started to erode in some parts of the world as a wall in some countries is starting to pop up. This is due to corporations maybe wanting to hide information on a search engine (maybe a CEO did something the public doesn't want public) or it could be down to your government wanting to hide information or stop the flow of information from entering their country. Twitter has recently been accused of stamping on free speech as the website has started to select which tweets may be permitted to enter a specific country. "Starting today, we give ourselves the ability to reactively withhold content from users in a specific country - while keeping it available in the rest of the world,". In some aspects I can see why a country may ask twitter to withhold a tweet, maybe the tweet holds false information which spreads lies or maybe information to spark a "planned revolution" which some allude to Libya as a case of this (see video).

Although saying this, you can't really blame twitter as it is acting because the government of that country is asking it to take it down. For example the company was threatened with being sued if didn't take down Hezbollah accounts down in Israel. So you can't really blame Twitter for being pushed into a tight corner.
On the other hand, twitter should also remain impartial because part of the Arab spring was motivated from information spread on twitter as well helping the protesters to organize and make ground such as Tunisia. This is why it is prevalent to keep the web open and transparent and helps to ensure democracy is kept intact, and gives a voice to the people by helping the communities to connect. This is what Tim Berners-Lees creation was about, an open and transparent network. He told The Guardian "Mobile operators and internet service providers must not be allowed to break the principle of "net neutrality" – that there should be no favouritism for connecting to certain sites online – Sir Tim Berners-Lee, the inventor of the world wide web, warned today." 



As well as this, the web is under attack around the world from bills such as ACTA which was designed by 39 countries who were not representatives. The United States also tried to pass PIPA and SOPA which did not ratify due from the outcry of playing foul from the population. They are now trying to implement CISPA which is similar act with the terms basically written more fancy. I think ACTA should not be ratified by the European Parliament because it will only benefit a small group of people who will profit immensely but affect millions of people around the world. There have been protests all over Europe which has led to some countries suspending the signing. Polish MP's wore Anonymous style Guy fawkes masks to protest the signing of the bill just as protesters did.









Tim Burnes-Lee says


"It is threatening the rights of people in America, and effectively rights everywhere, because what happens in America tends to affect people all over the world. Even though the Sopa and Pipa acts were stopped by huge public outcry, it's staggering how quickly the US government has come back with a new, different, threat to the rights of its citizens."

Cyberwarfare

Cyber technology has created another path for warfare to be executed in, cyberwarfare. Year on year, attacks being executed through the use of cyber technology are increasing, with the advancement  in technology, new ways of war are being dreamt up to combat the perceived threats. This increase is for multiple reasons, one that different countries are trying to gain information through cyberspace from enemies or using means to halt economic progression, two that countries are looking for new ways to gain the upper hand in warfare, as well as domestic and corporate organizations receiving attacks or online protests from the average civilian engaged in groups such as Anonymous. This could be why we have seen new bills trying to be passed into law in some countries such as PIPA, SOPA, CISPA and ACTA.

There are many reasons, it would seem, to invest in using cyberspace as a warzone. Most modern countries depend on cyberspace as a lot of they're infrastructures are in the cyber domain such as powergrids, communication tools, financial transactions and governmental agencies among other things. Taking out the infrastructure of a country is key in war to disrupt the opposing countries abilities to fight back. Although many say this threat is increasing, many people think that this threat is being hyped up by the cyber industry as a means of increasing revenue as it's services are more likely to be needed. It's not a profitable business if there are no threats. “There is no chance whatsoever that nuclear power plants will be hacked, that electric infrastructure would be hacked and taken down for any significant period of time,” said Jim Harper, Director of Information Policy Studies at the CATO Institute in Washington. “The worst we can expect is disruption – that's not war, it doesn't really terrorize. So the threats are serious but they're not to the level of war on terror."



Although saying this, we can see cyberwarfare taking place. Iran's nuclear facilities were targeted and infected with a virus called Stuxnet. Many suspect that either Israel or America were behind the infection due to the paranoia that they think Iran is planning to build a nuclear bomb, even though they say they are building parts for nuclear power. Stuxnet has been described as " the first cyber-weapon" as the scale of the attack and complexity of the virus has never been seen before. It infected around 16,000 computers due to the ability of self replicating. Ralph Langer said
" With Stuxnet we have opened a new chapter in history. There is now no way we can stop the proliferation of cyber-weapons".

This got me thinking about other cyber-weapons and cyber defence systems and the danger they may pose the population. The Haarp machine is a programme in Alaska used to research the ionosphere along with experimenting with it. They say transmit frequencies into a small beam of information into the ionosphere from the facility which can travel to any submarine submerged in the sea anywhere in the world.
It is true to say that internet is trawling with silly conspiracies about the capabilities of what this machine can do from mind control, to weather manipulation, to anti missile defence systems and many more but some of this may have some merit. The U.S denies this but the United Nations is taking the machine seriously. A UN report says this "HAARP could function as an anti-missile and anti-aircraft defence system, permit interception and disruption of communications, weather and submarine and subterranean communications, among other things.  The HAARP patent papers also stated that the invention could “simulate and perform the same function as performed by the detonation of a heavy type nuclear device”.  It seems worrying to me that any machine could disrupt weather or perform the same act as a nuclear bomb without anyone knowing who did it. More over this technology it says in the report has seen a rise of cancer in the surrounding area. This is untested water when experimenting on our atmosphere so they could be walking or "beaming" into a catastrophe. This machine leaves no traces behind so it is worrying that they could run away with the idea. Europe and Russia have similar devices but are considerable smaller and less powerful.

As we have become so dependent on modern technology and cyberspace to communicate it is now easier to disrupt the communication between a population. When Egypt had the uprising in 2011, a country still in turmoil, the government turned off the internet. This was a massive blow to the protesters as they used social networking sites to organise and prepare themselves whilst also spreading and releasing information to the outside world. It could be argued that by turning off the internet this is a cyber-weapon itself. Egypt triggered the cyber communities to come together to help they Egyptian population. Communities such as Telecomix and Anonymous joined forces to help get communication flowing again by using dial-up devices and by flooding Egyptian fax machines with information to help them. They do the things our governments don't think to do or won't act on on doing.

Another type of Cyberwarfare being used is by turning off the mobile network or making it appear as if the mobile is working when it isn't. The MET police can now turn off your mobile network when they want to and load a fake one to track an individual's where about's without them knowing. As well as this, the MET can do this to specific points, blanketing the area so everyone in the radios is under the illusion. We have also seen this tactic being used in America in San Franciso where a group of protesters were assembling to protest the shooting of an unarmed black man by a BART officer. Bart is a train system which turned off the mobile networks to stop the assembly. It seems to me that this trampling on free speech.

"All over the world, people are using mobile devices to protest oppressive regimes, and governments are shutting down cell phone towers and the Internet to stop them," said Michael Risher, a staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California. "It's outrageous that in San Francisco, BART is doing the same thing."

I'll leave you with a video showing you the direction in which the digital battlefield is evolving.

Video Games, the magic circle and the players

Video games and it's players behold a dynamic and vast link with each other. The game and the player both have a voice in the game, which can be affected from either side by various means. Though this is true, it has become apparent that the virtual world and real life are becoming entwinded.

The magic circle is the environment the game creates which is supposed to be intended for all players, although, some players either distort the circle or intend not to abide by it at all. The magic circle is like a cloak or cage, which harbours certain attributes, rules and ideas to keep the virtual system running. If there is not a stable magic circle then the reality of the game itself and the success of it could be in jeopardy as players do not want to take part in broken game play.    

In order for the game to be in harmony, the magic circle's rules normally need to be adhered to for the virtual  world to be successful. Some way's in which the player gets joy out of the game is through achievement, progression,a sense of victory or multi player participation(with strict rules). If these fundamentals are broken  , then the developer is likely to lose it's audience along with it's revenue.

Hackers,cheats,spoil sports or you could say the outsider, are a group of players who undermine the magic circle's rules of play, environment and disrupt the magic circle's ethics. This group play the game to experience a different enjoyment as opposed to the average player who abides by the magic circle. They get an enjoyment from stepping outside the virtual norms, to hack or annoy without any regard to other gamers playing experience.

Bowyer says "to cheat, not to play the game that reflected the norm, indicated that there was another world, the world of deception, in which people did not play the game, your game, but their own”. 

I think that this is because it gives them the sense of being powerful and having an advantage of the game which other players do not. As well as this, it helps them to reach the end game, if there is one at all in the game they are playing. The average player will grow a hatred for this group as it shatters their game reality as well as ruining their chances of succeeding in their objective. If there is to much hacking then the player will simply stop playing the game because there is no enjoyment for them any more. This is why it is important for the game maker to monitor hackers and ban players otherwise they will lose revenue, especially in games such as World of Warcraft. 

         

         Johan Huizinga says “The spoil-sport shatters the play-world itself. By withdrawing from the game he reveals the relativity and fragility of the play-world in which he had temporarily shut himself with others. He robs play of its illusion-a pregnant word which means literally “in-play” (from inlusion, illudere or inludere). Therefore he must be cast out, for he threatens the existence of the play-community.”

Glitchers on the other hand, are a group of players that don't really ruin the magic circle for other players but often take advantage from development errors. They do not altar the game's system. 

P. 114 –Playing with Videogames, James Newman, Routledge, 2009.

"Glitches vary significantly in their scale and severity and range from graphical artefacts or anomalies that do not dramatically affect or alter gameplay to those that can crash the game, and even the system on which it is running, or corrupt save data, thereby eliminating a gamer’s recorded progress."

It could be said that they take advantage of the magic circle for their own pleasure but do not distort it. Here are some of examples of glitching. 

                                                                 Halo 2 plasma glitching

                                                           World of Warcraft Glitching

Although the magic circle is intended to keep the game intact and running whilst keeping the theme and feel of the game coherent, this does not mean that the game cannot be affected by real life attributions or by game modifications. As well as this, businesses often invade the magic circle with advertising as well as Governments using games to advertise for they're Political campaigns. 

"JJ Richards writes that the ads-in-videogames market should reach $1 billion by 2014 and that Massive has already surpassed its quarterly sales targets."

Expect to see a rise in in-game advertising as the market is growing rapidly. Will this effect the coherence of the magic circle as it becomes more rife? It could be a deterrent for gamers to play certain games or it may just go unnoticed.

The Political world has also entered into gaming, well at least the U.S parties have. Political campaigns have seeped into the magic circle as to broaden they're influence on the voters for elections. In 2008 Obama had a lot of advertising in-game in Second Life. This included a virtual party Headquarters, billboards and also t-shirts with his face on. Other politicians included Hilary Clinton and John Mcclain who did similar things in Second Life. 

Whether it made any political impact is unknown but it seems there is a growing trend for this kind of campaigning.  

My final point is that i have found that the Virtual world and real life seem to me moving together. For example, a synthetic marketplace in an online game although virtual, has the ability to have real connections to the real market outside the game. This because company's have been set up to farm resources on a mass scale in game to sell to other players for real money. It is illegal but a very lucrative business, for example World of Warcraft has 10.2 million subscribers, if only a handful use an external company's service for resources then they have made a handsome revenue."In 2009 the global market for gold farming was valued at around $3bn annually". Here we have a connection between the real life economy and the virtual one, which can have an effect on the value of items in game e.g inflation and deflation. This merging of the economy begs the question, is the current definition for real life correct when we can see the line being blurred in so many ways?

Two worlds blurring together.

Game studies

The gaming culture is an interesting topic to discuss as it is rife in nearly every aspect of life. It could be said that there is a human need to game. This is apparent throughout history as we can see that gaming was a huge part of ancient civilizations. Gaming is a very sociable medium and also a way of engaging with the world so it is not surprising that we can see game playing throughout time. Although saying this, in the present day it is commonly said in the media that gaming is an anti-social medium and that it is dangerous and desensitizing which I agree with in some aspects.

Many people often think that gaming has only occurred in the last few hundred years.This could not be further than the truth. The Ancient Egyptians loved to game with each other, one of the most popular board games was called senet and is still played today. It could be said that gaming is a form of escapism, helping humans to relax and forget about the rest of their worries for a small snapshot, just like getting lost in a good book.

Multi player games gives people the opportunity to interact with each other, especially with online gaming such as Call of Duty and World of Warcraft. This games are based on the idea of interacting with other people around the world or your friends, so it is a contradiction when news outlets state that gaming is an anti-social medium. I do agree though that there is a danger of addiction with gaming, especially with MMORPG games such as World of Warcraft. Where as before humans gamed because it was a fun activity and a natural thing to do , I think there is now a danger of hyper-gaming and addiction. As technology advances, the gaming spectrum is broadened with new graphics and possibilities meaning that the game hooks are becoming more effective, resulting in a larger chance of game addiction. Too much immersion is never a good thing. I'm sure company's such as Blizzard would be happy with addiction as it keeps their revenues rolling. A drug cartel wouldn't stop selling heroin just because their customers become addicted.

We can see for ourselves the human need to game by thinking about children and how they act on a day to day basis.Children playing outdoors helps them to absorb basic knowledge about the surrounding world.  Children often invent games of their own with their own rules and style, we can see that this a way of them communicating and investigating with the surrounding world and people. These investigations help the child make decisions in what will form the personality traits of them growing, or maybe when a child plays hop scotch and falls over this will help make future decisions on how to jump more effectively. 

I would like to conclude that gaming is a fundamental human need that helps us develop in a for ever increasing stressful world. It is one of the key ways for us to relax and forget about our worries. But we need to be aware of the corporations who are of course out to make money, and don't think twice about the amount of immersion they allow to be presented to us as it can detrimental to our health.